linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	<akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <hughd@google.com>
Cc: <willy@infradead.org>, <ziy@nvidia.com>, <david@kernel.org>,
	<ljs@kernel.org>, <lance.yang@linux.dev>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "tmpfs: don't enable large folios if not supported"
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 10:46:37 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c915191-b477-40af-8d56-ba9f2c24c5ec@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2c7deee259a94b0d00a7c320d8d24d2c421f761.1776908112.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>



On 4/23/2026 9:41 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
> This reverts commit 5a90c155defa684f3a21f68c3f8e40c056e6114c.
> 
> Currently, when shmem mounts are initialized, they only use 'sbinfo->huge' to
> determine whether the shmem mount supports large folios. However, for anonymous
> shmem, whether it supports large folios can be dynamically configured via sysfs
> interfaces, so setting or not setting mapping_set_large_folios() during initialization
> cannot accurately reflect whether anonymous shmem actually supports large folios,
> which has already caused some confusion[1].
> 
> Moreover, for tmpfs mounts, relying on 'sbinfo->huge' cannot keep the mapping_set_large_folios()
> setting consistent across all mappings in the entire tmpfs mount. In other words,
> under the same tmpfs mount, after remount, we might end up with some mappings
> supporting large folios (calling mapping_set_large_folios()) while others don't.
> 
> After some investigation, I found that the write performance regression addressed
> by commit 5a90c155defa has already been fixed by the following commit 665575cff098b
> ("filemap: move prefaulting out of hot write path"). See the following test data:
> 
> Base:
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=400K count=10485 (3.2 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=800K count=5242 (3.2 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=1600K count=2621 (3.1 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=2200K count=1906 (3.0 GB/s )
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=3000K count=1398 (3.0 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=4500K count=932 (3.1 GB/s)
> 
> Base + revert 5a90c155defa:
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=400K count=10485 (3.3 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=800K count=5242 (3.3 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=1600K count=2621 (3.2 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=2200K count=1906 (3.1 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/testbs=3000K count=1398 (3.0 GB/s)
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=4500K count=932 (3.1 GB/s)
> 
> The data is basically consistent with minor fluctuation noise. So we can now
> safely revert commit 5a90c155defa to set mapping_set_large_folios() for all
> shmem mounts unconditionally.


> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ec927492-4577-4192-8fad-85eb1bb43121@linux.alibaba.com/
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> Note: for more investigation and test data, see:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/116df9f9-4db7-40d4-a4a4-30a87c0feffa@linux.alibaba.com/
> Thanks Kefeng for confirming the performance issue.

LGTM, Reviewed-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>

> ---
>   mm/shmem.c | 5 +----
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
> index 4ecefe02881d..dafbea53b22d 100644
> --- a/mm/shmem.c
> +++ b/mm/shmem.c
> @@ -3087,10 +3087,7 @@ static struct inode *__shmem_get_inode(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
>   	cache_no_acl(inode);
>   	if (sbinfo->noswap)
>   		mapping_set_unevictable(inode->i_mapping);
> -
> -	/* Don't consider 'deny' for emergencies and 'force' for testing */
> -	if (sbinfo->huge)
> -		mapping_set_large_folios(inode->i_mapping);
> +	mapping_set_large_folios(inode->i_mapping);
>   
>   	switch (mode & S_IFMT) {
>   	default:



  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-04-23  2:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-23  1:41 Baolin Wang
2026-04-23  2:37 ` Zi Yan
2026-04-23  2:46 ` Kefeng Wang [this message]
2026-04-23  2:57 ` Lance Yang
2026-04-23 13:20 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5c915191-b477-40af-8d56-ba9f2c24c5ec@huawei.com \
    --to=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox